30

worshipped by all creation, with the Father and the Holy Spirit unto the ages. Amen.

SCHOLIA. 1. By reason, on the one hand, the nature of beings is circumscribed for the genesis of virtue, according to progression;

which is the complete denial of nature according to virtue. But by the intellect the motion of every age and time is limited, for the constitution of an unerring union, according to ascent; which is the transcendence of those things in which nature exists; I mean, place and time, in which is the subsistence of beings. And the restoration according to grace to Him from whom are all things and through whom and unto whom as the end of all things, occurs by way of assumption; which is a passion of the one being assumed, but an energy of the one assuming.

2. Person, that is, hypostasis; nature, that is, essence. For essence, the "according to the image," is reason; but the "according to the likeness," life, is hypostasis, from both of which virtue is completed. For virtue is the hypostasis of wisdom; and they say that wisdom is the essence of virtue. Wherefore, the unerring manifestation of wisdom is the mode of contemplative conduct; but the basis of virtue has become the reason of practical contemplation. And the most unerring character of both is the unwavering contemplation of that which truly is.

3. That man is not immutable by nature; and how. 4. That the will is characteristic either of essence or of hypostasis; and between these

there is nothing, neither common and composite from both, nor partaking of neither. 5. That choice in Christ signifies the natural will; that is, the appetitive

power of nature. 6. See the mystery of the economy. (40) 7. On the text, "For in him we live and move and have our being;" that is, concerning essence, and

power, and energy. 8. Concerning deification. And may you also hear these things, Nilus; and may you think what those think who are

teachers of the truth. BY THE SAME TO THE SAME MARINUS

From the treatise concerning energies and wills, chap. 50(10). That Severus maliciously says that hypostasis is the same as nature, in order that the

he might confirm the confusion by means of the one nature, and might escape refutation, saying that by nature he had understood hypostasis; and again that he might introduce division, advocating a union from hypostasis; and might seem to be unobserved while asserting that he accepts hypostases instead of natures. And again, when accused of the non-existence of the natures through the bare difference, he might find a refuge for defense, the bare difference in natural quality. And that just as Nestorius, by speaking of a bare union, introduced an actual division; so also Severus, by speaking of a bare difference of natures, effects an actual confusion.

But Severus, being straitened by these arguments and not enduring the test of truth, again, as is his custom, puts forward falsehood as his ally; that it is the same

30

πάσης προσκυνουμένῳ τῆς κτίσεως, σύν Πατρί καί ἁγίῳ Πνεύματι εἰς τούς αἰῶνας. Ἀμήν.

ΣΧΟΛΙΑ. α´. Λόγῳ μέν ἡ φύσις περιγράφεται τῶν ὄντων πρός ἀρετῆς γένεσιν, κατά πρόοδον·

ἥτις ἐστί παντελής κατ᾿ ἀρετήν τῆς φύσεως ἄρνησις. Νῷ δέ περιορίζεται ἡ παντός αἰῶνως καί χρόνου κίνησις, πρός σύστασιν ἁπλανοῦς ἑνώσεως, κατά ἀνάβασιν· ἥτις ἐστί τῶν ἐν οἷς ἐστιν ἡ φύσις ὑπέρβασις· λέγω δέ τόπον καί χρόνον, ἐν οἷς τῶν ὄντων ὑπόστασις. Ἡ δέ πρός τόν ἐξ οὗ τά πάντα καί δι' οὗ καί εἰς ὅν ὡς πέρας τῶν ὅλων, κατά χάριν ἀποκατάστασις, κατ᾿ ἀνάληψιν γίνεται· ἥτις ἐστί τοῦ μέν ἀναλαμβανομένου πάθος· ἐνέργεια δέ τοῦ ἀναλαμβάνοντος.

β´. Πρόσωπον, ἤτοι ὑπόστασις· φύσις, ἤτοι οὐσία. Οὐσία γάρ, τό κατ᾿ εἰκόνα, ὁ λόγος· τό καθ᾿ ὁμοίωσιν δέ, ὁ βίος, ὑπόστασις ἐστιν, ἐξ ὧν ἀμφοτέρων ἡ ἀρετή συμπεπλήρωται. Ὑπόστασιν γάρ σοφίας, τήν ἀρετήν· οὐσίαν δέ φασιν ἀρετῆς εἶναι τήν σοφίαν. ∆ιό τῆς μέν σοφίας ἀπλανής ἔκφανσίς ἐστιν, ὁ τρόπος τῆς τῶν θεωρητικῶν ἀγωγῆς· τῆς ἀρετῆς δέ βάσις, ὁ λόγος τῆς τῶν πρακτικῶν θεωρίας καθέστηκεν. Ἀμφοτέρων δέ χαρακτήρ ἀψευδέστατος, ἡ πρός τό κυρίως ὄν ἀκλινής ἐνατένησις.

γ´. Ὅτι οὐκ ἄτρεπτος φύσει ὁ ἄνθρωπος· καί πῶς. δ´. Ὅτι τό θέλημα, ἤ οὐσίας ἤ ὑποστάσεως ἐστι χαρακτηριστικόν· καί μέσον τούτων

οὐκ ἔστιν, οὔτε κοινόν καί σύνθετον ἐξ ἀμφοῖν· οὔτε οὐδετέρου μετέχον. ε´. Ὅτι ἡ προαίρεσις ἐπί Χριστοῦ, τήν φυσικήν σημαίνει θέλησιν· ἤτοι τήν ὀρεκτικήν

τῆς φύσεως δύναμιν. ς´. Βλέπε τό τῆς οἰκονομίας μυστήριον. (40) ζ´. Εἰς τό, ∆ι᾿ αὐτοῦ γάρ ζῶμεν καί κινούμεθα, καί ἐσμέν· ἤτοι περί οὐσίας, καί

δυνάμεως, καί ἐνεργείας. η´. Περί θεώσεως. Ἀκούσαις δέ τούτων καί σύ, Νεῖλε· καί φρονήσαις ἅ φρονοῦσιν οἱ

τῆς ἀληθείας διδάσκαλοι ΤΟΥ ΑΥΤΟΥ ΠΡΟΣ ΤΟΝ ΑΥΤΟΝ ΜΑΡΙΝΟΝ

Ἐκ τῆς περί ἐνεργειῶν καί θελημάτων πραγματείας, κεφάλ. ν´(ι). Ὅτι Σευῆρος κακούργως ταυτόν εἶναι λέγει τῇ φύσει τήν ὑπόστασιν, ἵνα τήν

σύγχυσιν διά τῆς μιᾶς κυρώσῃ φύσεως, καί φύγῃ τόν ἔλεγχον, ὑπόστασιν λέγων νενοηκέναι τήν φύσιν· καί πάλιν τήν διαίρεσιν εἰσηγήσηται, τήν ἐξ ὑποστάσεως πρεσβεύων ἕνωσιν· καί δόξῃ λανθάνειν ἀντί φύσεων ἐκδέχεσθαι φάσκων τάς ὑποστάσεις. Καί αὖθις τήν ἀνυπαρξίαν τῶν φύσεων, διά τῆς ψιλῆς διαφορᾶς ἐγκαλούμενος, εὕρῃ καταφυγήν ἀπολογίας, τήν ψιλήν ἐν ποιότητι φυσικῇ διαφοράν. Καί ὅτι καθάπερ Νεστόριος ψιλήν λέγων τήν ἕνωσιν, πραγματικήν εἰσῆγε διαίρεσιν· οὕτω καί Σευῆρος ψιλήν λέγων φύσεων διαφοράν, πραγματικήν ποιεῖται τή σύγχυσιν.

Ἀλλά τούτοις Σευῆρος στενοχωρούμενος τοῖς λόγοις καί μή φέρων τῆς ἀληθείας τήν βάσανον, πάλιν ἑαυτῷ συνήθως τό ψεῦδος προβάλλεται σύμμαχον· ταυτόν εἶναι